Sociopath Community

i dont understand the delayed double split experiment

from my understanding, it's possible to monitor which slit the photon went through, and then store that data inside a database while not looking at the results

we can then determine the results simply by deleting or not deleting the data. if we delete the data of which slit the photon went through, we see a interference pattern. if we hold the data, we see the photon acting as a particle.

so my question is this. let's say we do this exact experiment, how is it that the photon never made it to w.e receiver has it, and if so, would that photon not interact with w.e it hit, and would that not collapse the function?

the fact that the photon can stay in a superposition through time,  dormant within the super position, until we view the results, and then we find it hit the back wall? doesn't that seem to imply our viewing of the results as a consciousness plays a roll? 

the wave function was in a super position until we looked? 

The superposition and the wave function IS collapsed even in the double slit experiment.

The fact is you do get single hits on the measuring device behind the slits (suggesting practicals) problem is that when you look at the spread of the hits and how they might have gotten that way, the only way to explain it is through a wave pattern.

So for your first question...basically yes

Second question...no

Didn't we talk about this last autumn?

Even the most qualified quantum physicists throughout history till now cannot answer that. They say anyone who thinks they know quantum physics, doesn't know quantum physics.

On the bright side, that experiment by Thomas Young opened the door to quantum physics, and that caused a boom in technology with quantum mechanics. Since quantum mechanics, and quantum theory are all branches on quantum physics.

Quantum mechanics can be found in all of our favorite electronics. Without it, we wouldn't have computers and pretty much every other electronic device we use today.

With that in mind, it's interesting how there are things, like the transistor, where somewhere along the lines of it's functionality, we don't understand why it works, it just does, so we make them and ship them out.

No individual can make any electronic device from absolute scratch, without borrowing off the shelf parts or parts that are made available by others that are in the same situation. Not even a plastic dollar store calculator.

If you ask me, none of this is real. And I mean everything, with the exception of the consciousness itself.

^Dude, do you have any idea how stupid things like Quantum teleportation and tunneling sound like?

It is obvious that relativity is a much more sane and logical approach.

Quantum physicists are nothing more than a paradigm which over mystifies the obvious.

Is light teleporting from one place to another? NO WAY... they move relative to each other across an unknown, yet to be discovered medium.

Science will not make a sturdy leap of logic to a safe conclusion, and that is why Quantum makes zero sense...

I didn't want to have to get into basic theoretical physics... but I will and I will help you understand where everything went wrong.

George Lemaitre theorized the Big Bang. He was a Belgian Catholic Priest.

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/science/sc0022.html

'A Day Without Yesterday': Georges Lemaitre & the Big Bang

Einstein did not take kindly to Lemaitre's use of the cosmological constant. He regarded the constant as the worst mistake of his career, and he was upset by Lemaitre's use of his super-galactic fudge factor.

When Einstein and Lemaitre met this is the photo that was snapped of them. Raw, human, and transparent. They did not agree...

However it is a LIE! A huge misconception...

They said, "He regarded the constant as the worst mistake of his career, and he was upset by Lemaitre's use of his super-galactic fudge factor."

It was George Gamow, proponent of teh Quantum Physics paradigm, who smeared Einstein after he was dead in his auto-biography.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Gamow

Einstein was a supporter of the Static Universe paradigm. Gamow is also a father of Quantum sciences. Einstein a GOD in relativity, and Gamow and others fighting for the biggest honours bestowed by Science~!!! Big stuff on the line...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Static_universe

^ In George Gamow's autobiography, My World Line (1970), he says of Einstein: "Much later, when I was discussing cosmological problems with Einstein, he remarked that the introduction of the cosmological term was the biggest blunder of his life."

These people were at war with each other at a theoretical physics level.

What do the Big Bang, Quantum, and Steady State all have to do with each other? This is where the huge popular misconceptions about the Universe.

Anyways, to prove the Steady State, you simply need to look for the cosmic soup. It does not exist. The farther we look out into space, the deeper it is. There is no end... you can argue expansion, and tired light till your blue in the face. It is scalar logic, hence totally illogical...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Eddington

It was Arthur Eddington who first measured the Black Body of Space, more accurately that Gamow EVER guessed, and he guessed several times. That is not science. Failed answers to hypothesis are NOT acceptable conclusions.

Eddington was also heavily involved with the development of the first generation of general relativistic cosmological models. He had been investigating the instability of the Einstein universe when he learned of both Lemaître's 1927 paper postulating an expanding or contracting universe and Hubble's work on the recession on the spiral nebulae. He felt the cosmological constant must have played the crucial role in the universe's evolution from an Einsteinian steady state to its current expanding state, and most of his cosmological investigations focused on the constant's significance and characteristics. In The Mathematical Theory of Relativity, Eddington interpreted the cosmological constant to mean that the universe is "self-gauging".

 

What is a cosmological constant you say? Now we have come to know it as Dark Energy and Dark Matter. I will explain. Newtons G, is a constant that represents an unknown force. G = Gravity. We have not discovered the Gravitational Duo Poles, to fully understand where the forces of gravity are and how they work.

If you suck at physics, you should probably watch this around now, because I have alot of popular misconceptions to debunk.

There are 15 or so... they are absolutely incredible... It's a UCberklet lecture by Richard Mueller. He has industry experience and has his own theory, the Nemisis Star. (It is really a stretch of the imagination, I have trouble with it, but hey, it's possible.)

Anyways, we can't see Gravity, we don't know what it is... Einsteins Theory of Relativity solves these issues, because everything is measured relative to each other.

Big Crunch or Big Rip, doesn't matter, it is the Cosmological Constant that solved this by adding a (MEGA G) to the Universe. A great big unknown gap, similar to Newtons (G).

If you cannot see the Universe in full, make a constant to represent the unknown.

So... the Jist of it is... The Universe is way bigger than we could possibly understand. We cannot understand light other than to measure it in a practical relative way. Quantum computers are nowhere near a possibility. They are NOTHING except theory.

Quantum makes no sense... neither does the Big Bang.

Einstein is the person that has all the answers... It is a somewhat agnostic approach to science. As you can see, all the proponents for odd ball theories with no basis in logic, have heavy religious backgrounds. George Gamow, George Lamatiare are both highly religious. Gamow defected from Russia.

http://www.aip.org/history/ohilist/4325.html

And my mother's father was Archbishop of Odessa and in charge of all the religion for all the lands north of the Black and Azov Seas called New Russia [Novorossia]. And back in the father line, it was all military all the way back, and the mother's line was all clergy.

His family was astute and high ranking Clergy men.

Enough said...

Einstein was agnostic. He never conflated or confused his religious beliefs with his other beliefs, primarily the objective analysis for truth in science.

Arthur Eddington was a Quaker. Lightly religious. Some guy who wasn't raise in the harsh strict and oppressive environment of the Orothodox church.

We must understand the Orthodox churches are strict. We have never known anything along these lines in our times. Remember please that many scientists in the past that did not align themselves with relgious beliefs have been killed. Orthodox. Gamow and Lemataire.

Gamow and Lemataires works mystify science. On day one God created light, he said, "Let there be light!", and so there was the Big Bang.

Einstein was after the truth, as he was agnostic. This is what he said of the Big Bang.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre

Lemaître recalled him commenting "Vos calculs sont corrects, mais votre physique est abominable"[12] ("Your calculations are correct, but your physics is atrocious.")

That's all... and that's why I cannot be arsed to mystify Quantum theories... Religious biases. I could go on for days about this perspective, so if you can't see where the real information is, that's understandable, as you probably have rleigious bias you havent' sorted through yet...

Quantum mechanics is potentially different than Quantum theory. Quantum theory is bogus if you ask me. A totally skewed perspective, giving rise to ideas of teleportation and such...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_teleportation

I mean Quantum computers are a nice idea, but that isn't happening for centuries, if ever...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer

The field of quantum computing was first introduced by Yuri Manin in 1980[2] and Richard Feynman in 1982.[3][4] A quantum computer with spins as quantum bits was also formulated for use as a quantum space–time in 1969.[5]

As of 2014 quantum computing is still in its infancy but experiments have been carried out in which quantum computational operations were executed on a very small number of qubits.[6]

 

In other words, I do not accept the theories, however any practical results, yeah, that is mechanics...

In other words, the double split experiment can be explained very easily. Energy is introduced into the system, changing the system.

There is nothing mysterious about it. It is predictable.

If I were to accept Quantum theories as reality, then you can clearly see, the world would accept ridiculous unprovable and totally wrong theories such as the Big Bang.

Reading your posting is painful...

Hey at least everyone isn't vehemently defending the Big Bang. For years that's all people would do...

Guess this crowd simply doesn't give a shit...

Quantum mechanics and quantum theory are a branch of quantum physics. Behind all mechanics is physics anyway. Why guess they are potentially different ?

A quantum computer is under development by a university professor Dr. Seth Lloyd.  Where he has a computer getting answers from atoms that are encased in a cold can, and they got it doing some basic things, yet it's unconventional.

You may feel you can explain the dual slit experiment, and Ironically you can. But also, you cannot. That's the nature of quantum physics. It's pretty much what you assume it to be, while we know it's not, so stalemate. It remains as it is.